PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT OF COASTAL HABITATS IN LATVIA
LIFE02NAT/LV/8498
FIRST PROGRESS REPORT WITHOUT PAYMENT REQUEST Covering period 1 April 2002 – 31 May 2003
Report compiled by: Vija Znotiņa, Brigita Laime, Didzis Tjarve, Rita Birziņa, Kārlis Kalviškis
Faculty of Biology, University of Latvia Address: Kronvalda bulv.4, Rīga, LV 1010, LATVIA Phone +371-7034875; fax +371-7034874, e-mail [email protected] http://piekraste.daba.lv
May 29, 2003 Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...... 3 Background of the project...... 3 Overall and specific objectives...... 3 SUMMARY...... 4 Summary of activities during the report period...... 4 Summary of expenditures during the report period...... 7 DETAILED REPORT OF ACTIVITIES ...... 8 A. Preparatory actions, elaboration of management plans and/or action plans...... 8 C. Non-recurring habitat management...... 14 D. Recurring habitat management...... 14 E. Public awareness and dissemination of results...... 15 Annexes...... 22 Annex 1. Functional zoning...... 22 Annex 2. Recommendations of public...... 23 Annex 3. Seminars...... 25 Annex 4. Web-site...... 29 Annex 5. Publicity...... 30
2 INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT
The Baltic Sea coast of Latvia is an area of outstanding biological diversity, including habitats of Community importance – embryonic, white, grey and wooded dunes, western taiga and coastal meadows. The number of visitors in the sea coast is steadily growing, and natural habitats suffer mainly from the activities of visitors and inappropriate management. To preserve endangered coastal habitats of Community importance, while promoting the development of local economy, efforts must be made to map the priority natural habitats, maintain and restore endangered habitats, manage human activities, and to educate the public.
The Project area is the entire Baltic Sea coast – an approximately 300 m wide coastal zone beginning from the waterline in the terrestrial direction. In Latvia, this territory is traditionally protected as the Baltic Sea coastal protection belt. In areas where threatened habitats of Community importance (dunes, coastal meadows) continue outside of this belt, project actions extend to cover the entire areas of the habitats. The total surface area of the project is 18 000 ha. A total of 45 % of the proposal project territory is in Latvia’s legally protected territory system. However, at present, integrated habitat protection and management of the coast are not yet conducted in Latvia.
OVERALL AND SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
The aim of the project is the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of 23 habitat types (7 of them EU priority) and 4 plant species listed in the Habitats Directive, 9 habitat types according to the Bern Convention, and 16 species listed in Birds Directive; development of the basic framework for sustainable management of the coastal protection belt of the Baltic Sea in Latvia; promotion of a network of protected nature areas and micro- reserves of the Baltic Sea coast; raising of public awareness regarding the need for protection of habitats of Community importance.
Main actions of the project are:
- Mapping and evaluation of habitats of Community importance in the whole coastal protection belt;
- Planning of the appropriate protection and management measures in protected nature areas where there currently are no management plans;
- Implementation of management measures in the coastal zone in areas with large and increasing visitor activity;
- Restoration and maintenance of coastal meadows and grey dunes in areas where immediate protection actions are required (cutting of trees, reeds and bushes, mowing, grazing); removal of aggressive alien plant species (in some areas where they are rapidly expanding in distribution and destroying indigenous flora);
3 - The preparation and dissemination of information about LIFE project and about threatened coastal habitats of Community importance and their protection.
The main results expected are:
- Conservation measures to protect habitats of Community importance - tested in 14 demonstration sites (including 20 ha of grey dunes and 115 ha of coastal meadows) involving the implementation of habitat protection / management;
- Proposed Natura-2000 site network (which is in progress) evaluated; to possible amendments proposed;
- Potential Natura-2000 sites in the coastal protection belt identified and assessed;
- Digital maps, data bases, functional zoning and appropriate protection measures for coastal habitats of Community importance created and stored in municipalities and governmental environmental institutions;
- Plans for appropriate protection measures and management for 4 protected nature areas;
- Conducted public awareness programmes for local residents, visitors, land owners, decision makers, business structures (approximately 200 information boards and educational nature path established in the dune zone, 11 seminars held, 7 booklets, 20 leaflets, 1 book published, 2 films produced).
SUMMARY
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES DURING THE REPORT PERIOD
Main actions of the project during the report time were: administration of the project; preparation for habitat mapping; elaboration of management plan for Piejūra Nature Park; education of the public.
The elaboration of management plan for Piejūra Nature Park was the largest work in the year 2002. This work was started a year earlier as it was planned. In this sub-project we forced all the same problems which are expected in further years of the project – habitat mapping and elaboration of functional zoning; co-operation with municipalities and other state institutions; discussion with landowners and other public; cases of illegal building in the project area; solving conflicts of interests.
One of priorities was also the education of public. Efforts were addressed mainly to municipalities, as well state institutions, landowners, residents and visitors of the coastal areas. Five seminars were organised. Together, they were attended by at least 510 people. One leaflet is published (in Latvian and English), about the project, it’s aims and main actions. Web-site of project is established (http://piekraste.daba.lv).
At the first half of year 2003, the largest work was the preparation for habitat mapping – purchase of maps, Geographical Information Systems’ seminar, communications with
4 various institutions, training of experts, situation study, gathering information on woodland key habitats.
Following constraints were met:
• Troublesome bureaucracy of state institutions (purchase maps etc.).
• Changes in laws and regulations of government of Latvia.
• One more significant constraint is that some activities take mush more work as it was expected. These works are: communication with landowners (information, education); and assisting in preparation of changes of laws (Law on the Protected Belts; Law on the Physical Planning).
In conclusion. During the report time, the problem of protection and management of the coast in Latvia is actualised. Project team is established, actions are performed successfully. Co-operation with the Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Regional Development and Municipal Affairs, Union of Municipalities of Latvia; other projects (Emerald, Engure LIFE-Nature project), non-governmental organisations (Environmental Protection Club, Latvian Fund for Culture, Coalition Clean Baltic etc.) is established.
Table 1. Summary table of the activities during the report period Nr. Action Time plan Status A.1. Preparation of database of landowners and their April 2002 – July In progress interests regarding land use and coastal development. 2003 A.2. Digital mapping of habitats of Community April 2002 – April In progress 1,2 importance in the coastal protection belt. 2004 A.3. Plans of protection measures (functional zoning) for September 2003 – In progress 1, 2 habitats of Community importance in the coastal April 2004. protection belt. A.4. Making agreements and signing contracts with October 2002 – April In progress subcontractors and local farmers. 2004 A.5. Training of habitat experts. April 2003 – July In progress12 2003. A.6. The preparation of technical projects for restoration April 2003 – April Not begun yet and management of coastal habitats of Community 2004 importance. A.7. Development of management plan for protected April 1, 2002 – In progress (close to nature area Piejūra Nature Park. January 1, 2004 finish) 1 A.8. Development of management plans for the protected April , 2003 – Started nature areas Bernāti Nature Reserve and Užava January , 2004 Nature Reserve. A.9. Development of management plan for Vidzemes April, 2003 – Started Akmeņainā Jūrmala Nature Reserve. January, 2004 A.10 Establishment of microreserves for habitats and July, 2003 – July, Started2 species of Community importance. 2005 C.4. Restoration of grey dunes and white dunes by April, 2003 – Started destruction of expansive plants. October, 2004 D.2. Ensuring adequate control and protection in coastal April, 2003 – Not begun yet zone at Piejūra Nature Park. December, 2005 D.3. Ensuring adequate control and protection in coastal October, 2002 - In progress zone of North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve. December, 2005 D.4. Purchase of cattle for grazing management in April, 2003 – July, Started meadows. 2004.
5 Nr. Action Time plan Status E.2. Preparation and publishing of leaflets July, 2002 – April, In progress 2005 E.3. Preparation and publishing of booklets. January, 2003 – Started December, 2005 E.4. Seminars for stakeholders. January, 2003 – In progress1 December, 2005 E.6. Creation and updating of vortal about the LIFE April, 2002 – In progress project and about coastal habitats. December, 2005 E.8. Establishment and installation of information signs. April, 2003 – April, Not begun yet 2005 E.22. Participation in seminars and conferences. January, 2003 – July, In progress 2005 F.1. Administration of the project October, 2002 – In progress December, 2005 F.3. Establishment of steering group and organisation of October, 2002 – In progress steering group meetings. December, 2005 F.4. Monitoring the effect of management measures on April, 2003. – Started habitats and species. December, 2005 1 – action where time plan is exceeded significantly; 2 – action which is started earlier as it was planned.
Table 2. Summary of deliverable products
Product Action Deadline Progress E.3 1st booklet about LIFE project objectives and 31.03.2003 1 booklet in preparation actions. (draft) E.2 3 one-page informational booklets about coastal 31.03.2003 1 leaflet published habitats of Community importance. (15.05 2003, 1 in preparation
Table 3. Summary of project milestones
Milestone Action Deadline Progress F.3 Steering committee established. 31.10.2002 First meeting held in 12.12.2002 D.3 Control in coastal zone of North Vidzeme 31.10.2002 01.01.2003 Biosphere Reserve started. E.6 Created vortal about LIFE project. 31.12.2002 30.10.2002 E.4 First seminar about LIFE project organised. 31.03.2003 31.10.2002 A.5 Seminar for habitat experts organised. 30.06.2003 01.06.2002;
21.05.2003 E.22 Participating in conference. 30.06.2003 24.01.2003
6 SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES DURING THE REPORT PERIOD
Until May 1, 2003, main expenditures were:
1. planning and investigation (habitat mapping);
2. administrative expenditures (including purchase of technics etc.);
3. education of public (Table 4).
During the summer 2003, the expenditures will increase because practical measures are planned in project – habitat mapping and urgent management of habitats.
In several actions, works are being performed (Table 1) without expenditures (Table 4). In these actions, main works are preparation and planning which are paid by administrative costs (Action F.1.).
Table 4. Expenditures of the project
Ac- Personnel Travel External Durable Consu- Other Over- Total % of the Planned in tion assis- goods mable costs heads planned project tance materials
A.2. 7596.97 4439.94 1311.62 13348.53 9.11% 146575.00
A.7. 12282.23 3007.82 8518.90 1192.39 25001.35 65.40% 38230.00
D.3. 2357.89 2357.89 3.99% 59050.00
E.2. 481.22 481.22 0.98% 49300.00
E.4. 542.64 55.70 1636.61 2234.96 7.97% 28030.00
E.6. 1684.65 1684.65 4.01% 42010.00
E.22. 1787.97 812.39 2600.36 7.13% 36460.00
F.1. 50933.12 11464.42 73.41 134.12 62605.06 10.98% 570065.00
F.3. 65.14 65.14 0.37% 17430.00
F.4. 2408.42 2408.42 11.39% 21145.00
To- 75397.50 4795.79 481.22 18312.78 9959.63 2514.15 1326.51 112787.58 4.97% 2270860.00 tal
7 DETAILED REPORT OF ACTIVITIES
A. PREPARATORY ACTIONS, ELABORATION OF MANAGEMENT PLANS AND/OR ACTION PLANS.
Action A.1. Preparation of database of landowners and their interests regarding land use and coastal development.
Time plan: April 2002 – July 2003.
Progress. The data base is elaborated for the area of Piejūra Nature Park (approximately 24% of the project area). Currently, further work (database for the rest of project area) is inhibited due to factors which do not depend on us. All the information on the land property and it’s belonging is stored at the State Land Service of Latvia which has the monopoly on this information. Our problem is the purchase of this information - because the system how to sell this information to other state institutions is not clear.
However, the communication is maintained. Necessary information is stored at regional branches of State Land Service. One regional branch will deliver requested data next week, and other two regional branches are preparing the information.
Without this information, we don’t have addresses of landowners, therefore also the second part of this action, the questionnaire about the interests of landowners, is delayed. Test questionnaire has been accomplished in Piejūra Nature Park.
Changes/complications. It is foreseen that this action will not bee accomplished until July, 2003 which is the end of this action according to time plan. We hope to finish it until 30.09.2003 which is milestone.
Additional information. No.
Action A.2. Digital mapping of habitats of Community importance in the coastal protection belt.
Time plan: April 2002 – April 2004.
Progress. In this action, mapping of FFH habitats in whole project area, at a scale 1:10 000 is planned. In year 2002, habitats of Piejūra Nature Park (PNP) were mapped. PNP is located at a 30 km long part of the coastline; it’s area is 4289 ha, approximately 24% of the project area.
Before the field work, the method of evaluation of habitats as well the classification of habitats were elaborated. Seven habitat experts were educated (Action A5). Orthophoto maps were prepared, potential borders of habitats marked. Experts visited every site, checked and evaluated each habitat and it’s borders. For every habitat, following was evaluated: habitat type; value (how natural it is), disturbances, necessity for restoration and/or management; status of protection (is this habitat protected and are there protected
8 species?). The checked habitat borders were edited in computer. Attribute database with habitat parameters was created and functional zoning elaborated (Action A.3).
Mapping of PNP was the preparation for the mapping of whole project area which is planned in summer of 2003.
Changes/complications. This action was started a year earlier as it was planned (June 2002), and will be accomplished accordingly to the time plan.
Additional information. No.
Action A.3. Plans of protection measures (functional zoning) for habitats of Community importance in the coastal protection belt.
Time plan: September 2003 – April 2004.
Progress. Functional zoning is a digital map with layers which show habitat types, their assessment, appropriate regime of nature protection and it must be elaborated for whole project area. Functional zoning has been elaborated for protected nature area Piejūra Nature Park. The zoning was elaborated on the basis of habitat maps (Action A2) and development of management plan of Piejūra Nature Park (Action A.7). Zones were designed after discussions with habitat experts which did habitat mapping, and with other experts which studied this area – ornithologist, geologist, specialist of woodland key habitats, entomologist, botanist. Recommendations of municipalities, landowners and other stakeholders were included.
Following zones were designed:
1. Zone of micro-reserves (or: strictly protected zone). It includes mainly FFH habitats – native boreal forests, grey dunes as well habitat of insect Bembix rostrata.
2. Zone of nature reserves (or: zone of regulated regime). Here are lakes Garezers with surrounding areas, area between Carnikava and Mežciems, coast at the outlet of Lielupe River, island Mīlestības as well 3 existing nature reserves: Vakarbuļļi, Daugavgrīva and Lake Ummis.
3. Zone of seasonal restrictions –– nesting area of Sterna albifrons (listed in Birds Directive) at the River Lilaste outlet.
4.Recreation zone – areas which are actively used for recreation.
5. Neutral zone – areas with buildings.
6. Zone of landscape protection – areas which are not included in any of the zones listed above.
Zones are named and designed accordingly to the traditional zones in protected nature areas in Latvia and after discussions with experts.
9 All the maps of functional zoning in Piejūra Nature Park are published at: http://piekraste.daba.lv/LV/PjDP/kartes.shtml. Descriptions of zones are published at http://piekraste.daba.lv/LV/PjDP/plans20021220.shtml#v43 (in Latvian).
Changes/complications. This action was started earlier as it was planned – in October, year 2002, and it will be accomplished accordingly to the time plan.
Additional information. Annex 1: map of functional zoning, Piejūra Nature park.
Discussions on borders of functional zones in Carnikava municipality: see pictures below.
Proposals of Carnicava municipality are listened by In wet grasslands (FFH habitat) in valley of River representatives of Ministry of Environment, Forestry Gauja - discussions about the enlargement of Piejūra of Lilaste, Environmental Inspectorate of Latvia. Nature Park (PNP).
Experts of physical planning are proposing changes Discussion about car-parking place in PNP. of borders of PNP.
Action A.4: Making agreements and signing contracts with subcontractors and local farmers.
Time plan: October 2002 – April 2004.
Progress: Nine contracts with co-financiers are signed; other contracts with co-financiers are prepared and will be signed soon.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
10 Action A.5: Training of habitat experts.
Time plan: April 2003 – July 2003.
Progress. Training of habitat experts was carried in June 2002. All experts were botanists which previously have been taking part in various projects on evaluation of habitats. Seven experts (including with computer experts) learned principles of classification and habitat evaluation, visited various sites at the coast and evaluated them together.
Using the experience, gathered in year 2002, the classification of habitats and the method of evaluation is improved for the year 2003. In May 21, 2003, seminar about habitat mapping for 17 experts were organised. In May 30, field training for experts is organised; experts will train how to map and evaluate various habitats.
Changes/complications. This action was started earlier as it was planned – in June, year 2002, and it will be accomplished accordingly to the time plan.
Additional information. Pictures from the training of habitat experts: see below.
Transition mire. Coastal grassland with Armeria Beach and wooded dune maritima.
Action A.6: The preparation of technical projects for restoration and management of coastal habitats of Community importance.
Time plan: April 2003 – April 2004
Progress. According to the time plan, this action has not begun yet. Precise locations and details of constructions will be specified after habitat mapping (Action A.2.).
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action A.7: Development of management plan for protected nature area Piejūra Nature Park.
Time plan: April, 2002 – January, 2004
Progress. Piejūra Nature Park (PNP) is the largest protected nature area in the project area (4289 ha). Management plan (MP) was elaborated according to existing Recommendations of Ministry of Environment, for the preparation of management plans for protected nature areas.
11 As this action was started in April of 2002, before the official affirmation of our LIFE- Nature project, the elaboration of PNP management plan (MP) was treated as a separate project. The steering group for elaboration of PNP MP was created and various institutions, municipalities, projects, experts were invited. Two meetings of steering group were held. The first meeting was held in May 16; 42 persons were informed about the park, it’s aims, about the structure of plan and about possible collaboration between the project group and steering group. In the second meeting (August 30, 42 persons), the first draft of the functional zoning was presented and the borders of park were discussed.
Coastal habitats were mapped in a time span from June to August (details described in report on Action A.2). Area was studied also by ornithologist, expert of woodland key habitats, expert of insect species, expert of geomorphological processes of the coast, expert of plant species. Experts came together, elaborated localities of functional zones (details in report on Action A.3) and regulations for each zone.
In October 25 – 27, 2002, public discussions about the plan were organised. Audience of these meetings were: residents of the park, visitors, landowners, institutions, other concerned persons. As the area of park is divided between 3 municipalities (Rīga, Saulkrasti, Carnikava), one meeting in each municipality was held. Two weeks before the meeting, the announcements in local newspapers were published. As this topic was very actual, meetings were announced also in radio and in newspaper “Diena” (the central daily newspaper in Latvia). Meetings were attended by at least 147 persons (68 in Rīga, 44 in Carnikava, 35 in Saulkrasti). At the same time, questionnaires about the problems of management of PNP were distributed among various people; 147 questionnaires were distributed, 52 were received back.
Various proposals were received: from official organisations and administrative bodies (15 proposals), from residents of the park (34), from other (2). In public discussions, 46 oral proposals were received, and 8 proposals were received by e-mail. People had both positive and negative attitude to the plan. In general, holidaymakers and townspeople were positive. They recommended that: PNP needs stronger management; the building in PNP should be restricted; paths, parking places information desks should be established; the area of park should be enlarged. Several landowners were negative. They recommended to diminish the area of the park and to modify the regulations in functional zones, to allow the building, or to exclude private lands of the park.
After these meetings, communication with municipalities, landowners and groups of landowners is continued. As the result, borders of park and borders of zones are changed; some sites with buildings are excluded from the park. Currently, the final version of management plan is being prepared.
During the year 2003, the “Regulations on the conservation and exploitation” will be elaborated and submitted to the government of Latvia.
Changes/complications. This action was started earlier as it was planned – in June, year 2002, and it will be accomplished accordingly to the time plan.
Additional information. Pictures from the public discussion about the management plan of Piejūra Nature Park in Carnikava municipality: see below. Annex 2: recommendations for the management plan of Piejūra Nature Park, gathered in public discussions and questionnaires.
12 Presentation of habitat maps and Residents of the Park and Representatives from Carnikava maps of functional zoning. landowners. municipality.
Action A.8. Development of management plans for the protected nature areas Bernāti Nature Reserve and Užava Nature Reserve.
Time plan: April, 2003 – January, 2004.
Progress. In both areas, the preparation works are performed. In Užava: project team is established, maps and other materials prepared. There is communication with Emerald project (“Identification and evaluation of potential Natura – 2000 sites in Latvia”) about the enlargement of the area of the Reserve and about the necessary protection regime.
In Bernāti: one meeting with landowners is organised (15.02.2003) (Action E.4) , the next is planned (16.06.2003). Project team is established, maps and other materials are prepared.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action A.9. Development of management plan for Vidzemes Akmeņainā Jūrmala Nature Reserve.
Time plan: April, 2003 – January, 2004.
Progress. Preparation works are performed. Project team is established, maps and other materials are gathered.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action A.10. Establishment of micro-reserves for habitats and species of Community importance.
Time plan: July 1, 2003 – July 1, 2005.
Progress. In private and municipal forests in project area, the inventory of woodland key habitats is started, with the aim to establish micro-reserves. (In state forests, it is already performed, in scope of other project.)
In Pāvilosta (area of Actions C.1., E.15.), two micro-reserves are being established. According to Regulations of Government “On the establishment and management of micro-
13 reserves”, several documents are necessary for this action: substantiation; documents from the State Land Service, about the landowners; maps of micro-reserves. These documents are prepared for the submission to the Ministry of Environment.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
C. NON-RECURRING HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Action C.4. Restoration of grey dunes and white dunes by destruction of expansive plants.
Time plan: April, 2003 – October, 2004.
Progress. During the September and October, 2002, pilot study on the distribution and ecology of invasive species was accomplished. Approximately 60 kilometres of the coast were inventoried, in sites which previously were known as the most influenced by invasive species. Localities of invasive species were registered, their area, coverage, influenced habitats and plant communities were evaluated. Invasive species were found in 6 FFH habitats. The most aggressive species were Rosa rugosa, Gypsophyla paniculata, Amelanchier spicata. Literature on ecology and control of invasive species was analysed. Three students wrote their research works about this study. The results of the study are used in project.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. Pictures: see below.
Study of plant community. Stands of Rosa rugosa. Stand of Gypsophyla paniculata.
D. RECURRING HABITAT MANAGEMENT
Action D.2. Ensuring adequate control and protection in coastal zone at Piejūra Nature Park.
Time plan: April, 2003 – December, 2005.
Progress. Not begun yet.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
14 Action D.3. Ensuring adequate control and protection in coastal zone of North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve.
Time plan: October, 2002 - December, 2005
Progress. Inspector is contracted, control is performed successfully.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action D.4. Purchase of cattle for grazing management in meadows.
Time plan: April, 2003 – July, 2003; April, 2004 – July, 2004.
Progress. Responsive landowners are found. visi Communication with landowners about the localities of fences occurs.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. Picture (see beside): study of the potential localities of fences.
E. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND DISSEMINATION OF RESULTS
Action E.2. Preparation and publishing of leaflets.
Time plan: July, 2002 – April, 2005.
Progress. One coloured leaflet is issued in 10 000 copies, (2000 in English and 8000 in Latvian). In this leaflet, the aim, actuality, area, actions of the project are characterised; key species and habitats are pictured.
Currently, one more leaflet is in preparation. There are pictures and short descriptions of common species at the coast, simple explanation on development and protection of coastal habitats and Natura 2000.
Changes/complications. Three leaflets were planned for this period and one is issued. Reasons for the delay. After the first seminar (Action E.4.), we received many recommendations to organise more seminars and workshops, to communicate personally which will facilitate more flexible information exchange and reach more targeted audience. Municipalities and landowners demanded mainly the information about juridical questions, due to elaboration of physical plans and the establishing of new protected areas. So the form of work was changed - seminars were the priority of this period. And, unfortunately, the preparation of printed materials is delayed. Delayed leaflets are planned to be to be delivered in August, 2003.
Additional information. Leaflets (in Latvian and English) attached to the report.
15 Action E.3. Preparation and publishing of booklets.
Time plan: January, 2003 – December, 2005.
Progress. Booklet is not published; delayed.
One booklet is in preparation. Draft is written by Dr. A.Melluma and it contains recommendations on the physical planning in coastal municipalities. Currently, in many municipalities physical plans are elaborated or will be elaborated in near future; here, the protection and exploitation of the coast is designated. Therefore the subject of this booklet differs from the planned - it become a priority during the report period.
Changes/complications. Reasons for the delay: the same as for Action E.2. Delayed booklet is planned to be to be delivered in July, 2003.
Additional information. No.
Action E.4. Seminars for stakeholders.
Time plan: January, 2003 – December, 2005.
Progress. Three general and two local seminars were organised. Information about the seminars is summarised in Table 5. Schedules of seminars are published also at http://piekraste.daba.lv/EN/seminari.
In the first general seminar, institutions, municipalities and related projects were informed about the problems of coastal habitat conservation as well about the LIFE project - it's aims and main actions.
Discussions showed that people both from institutions and from municipalities have various opinions on how the coastal habitats should be protected. Many of them did not know the key legal acts concerning the physical planning in coastal areas or had various viewpoints on their interpratation. Therefore the second large seminar "Aspects of the legal protection of the sea coast" was organised.
In the second general seminar, main topics were: general principles and methods of planning in coastal areas; the role of spatial planning within the market economy; the legal force of documents issued by municipalities; the appeal against the decisions issued by municipalities; examples of territorial planning at the coast. It was good chance that the Justice of Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia, Ilma Čepāne, delivered a lecture about constitutional human rights on property and the building restrictions in coastal protection belt. Her publication on the legal aspects of protection of the coast is published on project web-site at http://piekraste.daba.lv/LV/likumi/sarga_krastu.shtml (in Latvian).
The third general seminar “The Elaboration of the Coastal Geographical Information System in Latvia” was organised in collaboration with SIA “Centre for Regional Studies”. The reason for this seminar was the constraints which we met while gathering maps and other information about the project area, for the preparation for the habitat mapping and functional zoning (Actions A.2, A.3). The information is hided in several institutions and nobody knows where to find it. Topics were: the contribution of our project to the elaboration of Coastal GIS in Latvia; aspects of exploitation of habitat maps; national
16 environmental monitoring program concerning the coast. Minister of Regional Development and Municipal Affairs Ivars Gaters delivered lecture about the national spatial plan and it's association with the coast. In discussions, participants concluded that Geographical Information System for the coastal areas is necessary; it would be positive to have one institution for that; that the state system for this function is un-arranged.
Two local seminars were organised in villages Nīca and Rucava (locality of Actions A.8 and E.20), in collaboration with Liepāja Regional Environmental Board, local municipalities, World Wildlife Fund, Liepāja Forestry Board, Inspectorate for Cultural and Historical Heritage in Liepāja district. Aspects of biodiversity and protection in Pape Nature park and management of Pape and Bernāti Nature parks were analysed. In discussions, people were asking mainly how the protection of the coast will influence their life and their business. Very typical is that someone is asking about the restrictions on his private land while his land is very far away from the coastal protection belt and from any protected area.
Table 5. General information on seminars. General seminars Place Time Participants The first seminar for stakeholders about the The Ministry of EU LIFE/Nature project “Protection and Environmental Protection 31.10.2002 130 management of coastal habitats in Latvia”. and Regional Development The Elaboration of the Coastal Geographical Faculty of Biology 30.01.2003 40 Information System in Latvia The second informative seminar: “Aspects of the legal protection of the sea coast” Faculty of Biology 7.02.2003 130
Local seminars Management of Pape Nature Park Rucava (Liepāja district) 15.02.2003 120 Management of Pape Nature and Bernāti Nīca (Liepāja district) 14.03.2003 90 Nature Reserve Changes/complications. One seminar was planned during the report period and 5 seminars were organised.
Additional information. Annex 3: pictures from the first, second, third general seminars and from local seminar in Nīca.
Action E.6. Creation and updating of vortal about the LIFE project and about coastal habitats.
Time plan: April, 2002 – December, 2005.
Progress. Web-site http://piekraste.daba.lv was started in October, 2002. Texts are both in Latvian and English. The site holds general information about the project and the project application; description of the project area; classification and description of coastal habitats in Latvia; photo gallery; information about the seminars. Only in Latvian: management plan for Piejūra Nature Park; maps of functional zoning for this area; distribution and ecology of invasive species; the legal regulations of building in the coastal protection belt of the Baltic Sea and Rīga bay.
Since October 2002, 2180 users (not including local users) have visited the site. During the last month, there are 20 – 50 visitors per day (in average).
17 Regularly we receive e-mails from visitors of website. Landowners, residents, townspeople are expressing opinion and asking questions mainly about aspects of protection of Piejūra Nature Park (Action A.8.). Often, schoolchildren are asking about particular localities, animal or plant species; students are sending questions concerning their scientific work.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. Annex 4: first page of web-site and logo of the project.
Action E.8. Establishment and installation of information signs.
Time plan: April, 2003 – April, 2005.
Progress. Not begun yet.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action E.22. Participation in seminars and conferences.
Time plan: January, 2003 – July, 2005.
Progress. During the report time, we have actively participated in 3 international conferences and more than 5 local conferences and seminars.
International conference on “Integrated coastal zone management in Mediterranean tourist regions” was organised by LIFE project “Med-Coasts S-T Project” in Calvia (Spain); 24.01.2003. Number of participants from our project team: 2. Our action: taking part in sessions; distribution of information page about our project. The gain: meeting similar projects and EU experts; information about key commitments for the EU countries concerning coastal protection and tourism policy.
Seminar “LIFE-Nature: experiences & future plans of the Baltic states and EU member states” was held in Vilnius (Lithuania), 07.03 – 08.03 2003. Number of participants: 1. Action: presentation of project (20 minutes); publication. The gain: many practical advises and experience for the successful management of LIFE-Nature project.
Coalition Clean Baltic 14th Annual Conference “Coastal management and spatial planning – conflicts and solutions” was organised in Renda (Latvia); 16.05.2003. Number of participants: 3. Our action: presentation “Habitat maps for the management of the sea coast” (20 minutes), work in sessions. Conclusions: there are similar problems of coastal protection in all the Baltic countries, but various solutions. In Lithuania: coastal protection belt is narrower (100 m) therefore it is easier to defend it (practically, there are no illegal buildings in this belt).
18 Success of Estonia: the state regulation requires to demolish illegal buildings. Earlier, it was the task of the municipalities which did not fulfil this requirement. Now, this obligation is set to the State Institution of Building which is more independent and therefore can do it easier.
Local events were rather many; here only these where we took part actively are listed. “Management of strictly protected nature areas” was organised by Emerald project and by LIFE-Nature project “Implementation of management plan for the Lake Engure Nature Park” in Engure, 25.08. – 28.08. 2002. Participants: 2. Action: presentation of the project. Gain: learning the experience of Engure LIFE project. Conclusions. 1. It is very important to study the opinion of the public, concerning various groups of interests. 2. Scientific foundation for every activity of protection is necessary. The meeting of deputies of Rīga Council and residents of Rīga was organised 12.02.2003. Participants: 5. Action: presentation about the protection of Piejūra Nature Park (15 minutes); answering questions submitted by residents. Conclusion: there is a big misunderstanding of opinions between of residents and deputies of Rīga. Conference “The coastal protection and humanity” was organised by Environmental Protection Club of Latvia. Participant: 1. Action: project presentation (20 minutes). Gain: contacts with various groups of people. Conclusion: the international movement “Blue Flags” is a tool for the affecting the managers of beaches, for the sustainable management. Conference “The cultural and historical heritage in lower part of the River Daugava valley and problems of it’s conservation”, 15.05.2003, was organised by Rīga City Council and by Latvian Fund of Culture. Participant: 1. Action: presentation “Piejūra Nature Park” (30 minutes). Conclusions: the coast must be protected in complex with the protection of cultural and historical monuments etc. Problems can arise if the planned terminal (oil shipment) will be built.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. Picture of participants of CCB conference: see above.
Action F.1. Administration of the project.
Time plan: October, 2002 – December, 2005.
Progress. The permanent staff is listed in table. Professional Category Position Staff Project manager Project manager Full staff Coordinator Project coordinator Full staff Coordinator Information coordinator Full staff Coordinator Regional coordinator Full staff Coordinator Regional coordinator 3/4 staff Coordinator Regional coordinator 3/4 staff Graduate technical Computer expert Full staff Graduate technical Financial consultant 1/2 staff Graduate technical Jurisconsult 1/4 staff Graduate technical Jurisconsult 1/4 staff Non-graduate technical Computer expert assistant Full staff Secretariat Project assistant Full staff Inspector Inspector Full staff
19 Short-time contracts are signed with experts and consultants. One more regional coordinator will be contracted later.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Action F.3. Establishment of steering group and organisation of steering group meetings.
Time plan: October, 2002 – December, 2005.
Progress. Steering group was established in December, 2002. Two meetings of the group have been held.
The first meeting was held in December 12, 2002. It was attended by 10 persons from various institutions and 5 persons from the project team. Following institutions were represented: Lielrīga and Liepāja Regional Environmental Boards; Engure Nature park fund; Environmental State Inspectorate; North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve; Ministry of the Environment (Department of Nature protection and Department for Building); Environmental Protection Board; Latvian Union of Municipalities of Latvia.
Project team reported about following topics: the overview of the project; current results of the project (study on distribution and ecology of alien species; elaboration of management plan of Piejūra Nature Park; seminars; web-site; information exchange with other projects); works which are planned in the next quarter (database of landowners; contracts; information pages and booklet; seminars; web-site). Most of the questions from steering group members were about Piejūra Nature Park: details of the public discussion; registration of the land property.
The second meeting of the steering group was held in March 26, 2003. Following institutions were represented: Environmental State Inspectorate; State Forestry Board; Ministry of Regional Development and Municipal Affairs (Department of Physical Planning); Ministry of Environment (Department of Nature protection); Latvian Union of Municipalities of Latvia.
Themes reported by the project group were: current situation in elaboration of Piejūra Nature Park management plan; contracts; preparation of maps for the field season; seminars; information page; financial situation in general; further works (habitat mapping; management plans for other protected nature areas; information signs; monitoring.).
20 In both meetings, the steering group expressed positive opinion about the project progress. All the communication was recorded.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. Pictures from the first meeting of steering group: see above.
Action F.4. Monitoring the effect of management measures on habitats and species.
Time plan: April, 2003. – December, 2005.
Progress. Currently, experts are being preparing for this work. Monitoring is planned in sites of management actions. Most of these sites are not precisely known before the habitat mapping; these sites are concretised now. In Roja, Salacgrīva, Ainaži, localities are known rather precisely.
Changes/complications. No.
Additional information. No.
Participation in state events and programmes; publicity.
Some of the project activities were going out of the plans of the project application and are summarised in following sub-chapter.
In the Ministry of Environment, project team took part in the elaboration of Strategy on the Biological Diversity of Latvia and in the preparation of Action Plan for this strategy (concerning coastal habitats).
Currently, the new redaction of the Law “On the Protected Belts” is discussed in the Parliament of Latvia. Representatives of the project are attending meetings of the Commissions of the Parliament and taking part in this discussion.
Many people, state and private organisations have expressed interest to the project. Meetings with journalists from local and central newspapers, television, radio have occurred (mainly, during the elaboration of management plan for Piejūra Nature Park). In 8 newspaper articles, names “LIFE-Nature”, the project title or the link of project web-site is listed. Many more articles were citing opinion of members of the project team, without reference on the project.
In October 2002, we were invited in 30 minutes long discussion in the television. The subject of discussion was the protection of Piejūra Nature Park. The event lasted 30 minutes and it was showed twice in the First program of the Latvian Television.
Co-operation with NGOs – Environmental Protection Club, Latvian Fund for Culture, Association of Landscape Architects is established.
Additional information. Article “On the management and protection of the coast”, published in “Universitātes Avīze”, 22.10.2002, can be viewed online: http://home.lanet.lv/~luua/20022003/04/par.html. Annex 5: Copy from newspaper and picture from television.
21 ANNEXES
ANNEX 1. Functional zoning.
Action A.3. Plans of protection measures (functional zoning) for habitats of Community importance in the coastal protection belt.
22 ANNEX 2. Recommendations of public
Action A.7: Development of management plan for protected nature area Piejūra Nature Park.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE MANAGEMENT PLAN OF PIEJŪRA NATURE PARK, GATHERED IN PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS AND QUESTIONNAIRES.
Recommendations are covering following themes: facilities for visitors, management of lakes, waste management, costs, information and education; culture and history, changes of borders, activities which should be controlled and prevented, staff, administration, prevention of buildings, business, landowners’ rights, functional zones. Several recommendations and questions were not directly connected to our project (advises and questions to other institutions; comments on legislation etc.) and are not summarised here.
Facilities in general (10 recommendations): paths, waste bins, roads, roads for bicycles, alternative to each restriction are needed.
Facilities in particular sites (18): resting sites in Carnikava; walker's path in Lilaste; don't plan path in Bātciems; area in Daugavgriva Nature reserve should be kept untouched; Lake Vakarbuļļi, River Langa, channel Eimuri und River Bullupe should be cleaned; flood in island Bulli should be prevented; flow of visitors in Vecāķi should be managed; how the grasslands in the left side of River Gauja will be managed? Advices for localities of parking sites.
Lakes (7): advices to dig a ditch between lakes Garezers; redirect people from Lake Ummis to Lakes Garezers.
Waste management (4): waste bins must be places and restoration of sites with illegal waste dumps is necessary.
Costs (3 questions, from state institutions): How mach the imlpementation of plan will cost? Who will manage the park? Piejūra Nature Park is established by the state; state should manage the park instead of asking municipalities the responsibility for the management of park.
Management: information, education, excursions (12). Recommendations on the content of information desks; excursions in the park should be organised; private owners should be educated.
Culture and history (5). Recommendations to include in the park: lighthouse Lilaste, historical sacred sites, Komētforts; inventory and restoration of old buildings in Mangaļsala is necessary; the evaluation of old buildings left by Soviet army is desirable.
Borders: to enlarge area of park (13). Recommendations to include in the park: white dune and surrounding area in Saulkrasti; Lake Ummis; outlet of River Daugava; area at Gauja River (south from Carnikava); northern part of Kurpnieku island in Daugava; area between River Ķīšupe and town Zvejniekciems; surrounding of Lake Ķīšezers.
23 Borders: to diminish the existing area of park (8). To exclude: territories of building; all private lands; my private land. (These recommendations are proposed by landowners.).
Borders: not include areas which have not been in the park (1). Not include grasslands at the left side of River Gauja.
Activities which should be controlled and prevented (23): traffic of motorised boats; formation of illegal roads; cars in forest and dunes.
Staff for the control (4): special staff should contracted, to control the activities of visitors in Piejūra Nature Park.
Administration (4) the park should have it's own administration.
Recommendations to prevent building and to conserve the park (8): advises to prevent the building in general and in particular sites.
To support the business and building in the park (7). The interests of landowners should be taken in account; not to stop business in the park. Recommendation to build valuable houses at the coast because in this way municipalities will get more money from taxes and this will favour the welfare of the residents in municipality (this advice comes from the head of Saulkrasti municipality);
Rights of the landowners (3). The elaboration of management plan can not turn against the rights of landowners.
Zones - in general (6): functional zones are necessary; descriptions of zones should be more understandable.
Zones - particular sites (12): micro-reserves should be established in Vecāķi and Lakes Ummis, Garezers, recommendation to take away seasonal restriction for Sterna albifrons because these birds are not nesting here (opinion about the background for this recommendation are diverse: landowners say that these birds never have nested here however other people say that landowners with their building activities have frightened the birds); to change zone in areas with remains of Soviet army.
Zones - Rīga (14). Building zone and all private lands in Vakarbulli - to neutral zone; micro-resesrves should be established in Daugavgriva; Recreation zone in Mangalsala and Ritabulli; (more specific recommendations on particular sites).
24 ANNEX 3. Seminars
Action E.4. Seminars for stakeholders. The first seminar for stakeholders about the EU LIFE/Nature project “Protection and management of coastal habitats in Latvia”.
Valdis Bisters, Ministry of Prof. Indriķis Muižnieks, prorector of University Brigita Laime, Environment. of Latvia project team.
Prof. Ilma Čepāne, Justice of Didzis Tjarve, project team. Kārlis Kalviškis, project team. Constitutional Court of Republic of Latvia.
25 Vija Znotiņa, project team. Maruta Kaminska, Liepāja Sandra Bērziņa (right), director of Regional Environmental Board North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve (project partner). (project partner).
Rita Birziņa, project team. Participants
26 Seminar “The Elaboration of the Coastal Geographical Information System in Latvia”
Ivars Gaters, Minister of Regional Development and Kārlis Kalviškis, project team (GIS expert). Municipal Affairs.
Local seminar in Nīca “Management of Pape Nature Park and Bernāti Nature Reserve”
27 Informative seminar: “Aspects of the legal protection of the sea coast”
A.Petermanis, head of Nīca municipality. Leopolds Ozoliņš, deputy of Parliament of Latvia.
Andris Maisiņš, Nīca municipality. Didzis Tjarve (project team) and representatives from municipalities.
Dzintra Upmace, Ministry of the Regional Development and Municipal Affairs.
28 ANNEX 4. Web-site
Action E.6. Creation and updating of vortal about the LIFE project and about coastal habitats.
First page of the web-site http://piekraste.daba.lv.
Logo of the project was compiled from LIFE logo and drawing of Kārlis Kalviškis.
29 ANNEX 5. Publicity
“Plan for the conservation of sea coast. Residents are invited to take part in evaluation.” Published in: Diena (the biggest daily newspaper in Latvia), 12.11.2002. This article was published after our first seminar Action E.4.) and is characterising main actions of the project and zoning of Piejūra Nature Park. LIFE-Nature program is mentioned and public discussions about management plan of Piejūra Nature Park (Action A.7.) are announced.
Photo from television discussion about Piejūra Nature Park. Valdis Kalnozols (left), head of the Committee of Environment, Rīga City Council and Brigita Laime (right), project team. More than 20 persons from various institutions also took part in the discussion.
30